The long-term virologic and pathologic impact of renal transplantation on chronic hepatitis B virus infection

Management strategies for common viral infections in pediatric renal transplant recipients

Viral infections have been considered as a major cause of morbidity and mortality after kidney transplantation in pediatric cohort. Children are at high risk of acquiring virus-related complications due to immunological immaturity and the enhanced alloreactivity risk that led to maintenance of high immunosuppressive regimes. Hence, prevention, early detection, and prompt treatment of such infe ctions are of paramount importance. Among all viral infections, herpes viruses (herpes simplex virus, varicella zoster virus, Epstein-Barr virus, cytomegalovirus), hepatitis B and C viruses, BK polyomavirus, and respiratory viruses (respiratory syncytial virus, parainfluenza virus, influenza virus and adenovirus) are common in kidney transplant recipients. These viruses can cause systemic disease or allograft dysfunction affecting the clinical outcome. Recent advances in tech nology and antiviral therapy have improved management strategies in screening, monitoring, adoption of prophylactic or preemptive therapy and precise trea tment in the immunocompromised host, with significant impact on the outcome. This review discusses the etiology, screening and monitoring, diagnosis, pre vention, and treatment of common viral infections in pediatric renal transplant recipients.

Dynamics of cellular immune responses in recipients of renal allografts positive for hepatitis B surface antigen

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive renal transplantation recipients must take lifelong immunosuppressants and nucleotide analogues (NAs). We investigated the cellular immune responses of HBsAg-positive renal transplantation recipients taking immunosuppressants and NAs.

METHODS

Blood samples were collected from HBsAg-positive individuals with end-stage renal disease on the transplant waiting list (Group 1) and renal transplantation recipients taking immunosuppressants and NAs (Group 2) or immunosuppressants without NAs (Group 3). Hepatitis B virus (HBV)-specific pentamers were used to quantify circulating HBV-specific CD8⁺ T cells.

RESULTS

Groups 2 and 3 had higher cellular immune responses, as indicated by significantly lower regulatory T (Treg)/CD8⁺ T cell ratios than Group 1. With undetectable viral loads under both immunosuppressant and NAs, the CD8⁺ T cell and HBV-specific CD8⁺ T cell frequencies were similar in Group 2 and Group 1. Patients in Group 3 did not use NAs and had an elevated viral load and higher HBV-specific CD8⁺ T cell and IFN-γ-producing HBV-specific CD8⁺ T cell frequencies, but lower a frequency of programmed death-1 (PD-1)⁺ HBV-specific CD8⁺ T cells than the other groups. Increased viral replication in Group 3 resulted in significantly higher CD8⁺ T cell and IFN-γ-producing CD8⁺ T cell frequencies than Group 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunosuppressant therapy increases viral replication in HBsAg-positive renal transplant recipients due to disabling or dysregulation of virus-specific CD8+ T cells. The higher cellular immune responses due to lower Treg/CD8+ T cell ratios in HBsAg-positive renal transplant recipients may be one of the reasons to induce liver pathology because of uncontrolled viral replication.

Position paper on liver and kidney diseases from the Italian Association for the Study of Liver (AISF), in collaboration with the Italian Society of Nephrology (SIN)

Liver and kidney are strictly connected in a reciprocal manner, in both the physiological and pathological condition. The Italian Association for the Study of Liver, in collaboration with the Italian Society of Nephrology, with this position paper aims to provide an up-to-date overview on the principal relationships between these two important organs. A panel of well-recognized international expert hepatologists and nephrologists identified five relevant topics: 1) The diagnosis of kidney damage in patients with chronic liver disease; 2) Acute kidney injury in liver cirrhosis; 3) Association between chronic liver disease and chronic kidney disease; 4) Kidney damage according to different etiology of liver disease; 5) Polycystic kidney and liver disease. The discussion process started with a review of the literature relating to each of the five major topics and clinical questions and related statements were subsequently formulated. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were graded according to the GRADE system. The statements presented here highlight the importance of strong collaboration between hepatologists and nephrologists for the management of critically ill patients, such as those with combined liver and kidney impairment.

Current state of kidney transplantation in patients with HIV, hepatitis C, and hepatitis B infection

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C (HCV), and hepatitis B (HBV) are common chronic viral infections in the end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patient population that were once considered relative contraindications to kidney transplantation. In this review, we will summarize the current state of kidney transplantation in patients with HIV, HCV, and HBV, which is rapidly evolving. HIV+ patients enjoy excellent outcomes in the modern transplant era and may have new transplant opportunities with the use of HIV+ donors. Direct-acting antivirals for HCV have substantially changed the landscape of care for patients with HCV infection. HBV+ patients now have excellent patient and allograft survival with HBV therapy. Currently, kidney transplantation is a safe and appropriate treatment for the majority of ESKD patients with HIV, HCV, and HBV.

Telbivudine for renal transplant recipients with chronic hepatitis B infection: a randomized controlled trial with early termination

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to analyze changes in renal function in HBsAg-positive renal transplant recipients receiving lamivudine who did or did not switch to telbivudine.

METHODS

In this prospective randomized clinical trial (RCT), HBsAg-positive renal transplant recipients who had received lamivudine prophylaxis for at least 6 months were 1:2 randomized to receive either lamivudine or telbivudine for another 24 months. Renal function was evaluated by creatinine level and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at the time of randomization (baseline), 6, 12, 18, and 24 months respectively.

RESULTS

This RCT was prematurely terminated after recruiting only 17 patients due to a high incidence (61.5%; 8/13) of clinical myalgia in the telbivudine group. Cox's proportional hazards model revealed that there was no independent predictor of myalgia. Based on intention-to-treat and per protocol analyses using generalized estimating equations, the patients in the randomized telbivudine group had a significantly increased eGFR and the patients in the lamivudine group had a significantly decreased eGFR at the end of follow-up compared to the values at study enrollment. However, there was no significant difference between the lamivudine and telbivudine groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The renal protective effect of telbivudine for HBsAg positive renal transplant recipients was uncertain for high incidence of myalgia and only patients who were on telbivudine for 24 months had renal function maintenance.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation during belatacept treatment after kidney transplantation

We report a case of HBV reactivation following belatacept treatment in a patient who underwent kidney transplantation in 2015 for HIV-associated nephropathy (HIVAN). Human immunodeficiency virus viral load was undetectable prior to transplantation, and CD4+ lymphocyte count was greater than 300/mL. Baseline HBV serology at transplantation was HBsAg negative, anti-HBcAb positive, anti-HBsAb 312 UI/L, and HBeAg negative/anti-HBeAb positive. Liver function tests were normal, and viral DNA was undetectable. Two years later, the patient presented with severe acute hepatitis after a progressive disappearance of anti-HbsAb, quickly followed by HBV reactivation. Immunosuppressive treatment was drastically reduced, and treatment with entecavir was started. The outcome was favorable, and HBV DNA became undetectable after 9 weeks of treatment. This is the first report of acute hepatitis related to HBV reactivation in a kidney transplant recipient treated with belatacept. The risk for HBV reactivation in patients treated with belatacept should not be underestimated, especially in those with resolved HBV infection.

Long-term data on entecavir treatment for treatment-naive or lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B infection in kidney transplant recipients

INTRODUCTION

Entecavir (ETV) showed short-term efficacy and safety in HBsAg-positive kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), but long-term data are lacking.

METHODOLOGY

We retrospectively reviewed 30 HBsAg-positive KTRs who received ETV during 2007-2017.

RESULTS

Eighteen treatment-naïve (Group I) and 12 lamivudine-resistant (Group II) patients received ETV for 48.4 ± 35.2 and 66.0 ± 26.0 months, respectively. Both groups show significant HBV DNA decline, but Group I achieved earlier undetectability after 11.9 ± 9.6 months (compared with 28.8 ± 24.2 months in Group II, P = .033). Group I showed higher rates of undetectable HBV DNA (89%, 94%, 94%, 100%, and 100% at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months, respectively, compared with 25%, 50%, 50%, 91%, and 91% in Group II, P = .003). ALT normalized after 6.0 ± 1.9 and 6.8 ± 2.1 months in Group I and Group II, respectively. Four patients (33.3%) in Group II developed drug resistance (2 had persistent viraemia and 2 had virological breakthrough, at 40.3 ± 15.0 months). Group II showed higher liver stiffness after 5 years (7.7 ± 4.1 kPa, compared with 5.0 ± 1.6 kPa in Group I, P = .046) and incidence of cirrhosis (4 patients [33.3%], compared with 1 [5.6%] patient in Group I, P = .049). Two patients (one in each group) developed hepatocellular carcinoma. Renal allograft function remained stable during follow-up of 63.2 ± 33.4 months for both groups. There was no difference in patient and graft survival between two groups at 5 years (P = .62 and .36, respectively).

CONCLUSION

ETV showed favorable long-term efficacy and tolerability in treatment-naïve KTRs. One-third of lamivudine-resistant subjects showed non-response or viral breakthrough after ETV treatment.

Durability of Antibody Response Against the Hepatitis B Virus in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Proposed Immunization Guideline From a 3-Year Follow-up Clinical Study

Background

Despite the importance of hepatitis B virus (HBV) immunization in kidney transplantation (KT), data are lacking on fluctuations in hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBsAb) levels and optimal levels for KT recipients.

Methods

The study consisted of anti-HBsAb-positive recipients aged 18–70 years at the time of the KT. Recipients with anti-HBsAb <100 IU/L received a single booster HBV vaccination, and anti-HBsAb was measured at baseline and 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-KT. Anti-HBsAb, quantitative HBV deoxyribonucleic acid testing (12 and 24 months post-KT), and hepatitis B core-related antigen (24 months post-KT) were evaluated in recipients with anti-HBsAb >100 IU/L who received a hepatitis B surface antigen positive renal allograft.

Results

Seventy-six of 257 (29.6%) KT recipients with anti-HBsAb <100 IU/L at the time of enrollment received a single booster of HBV vaccination. Anti-HBsAb levels increased (≥100 IU/L) 1 and 3 months post-booster dose in 86% and 93% of cases, respectively. Anti-HBsAb levels were ≥100 IU/L in 95% of these recipients 6 months post-booster dose. Among 181 (70%) recipients with anti-HBsAb ≥100 IU/L without a booster dose, anti-HBsAb gradually decreased after the KT from 588 IU/L at baseline to 440 and 382 IU/L 3 and 6 months post-KT, respectively (P < .01).

Conclusions

To ensure optimal immunity against HBV, KT recipients should first be stratified according to their risk of HBV reactivation. Kidney transplantation recipients of renal allografts from HBV nonviremic or viremic donors should be reimmunized when their anti-HBsAb titers are <250 IU/L. A cutoff level of 100 IU/L is recommended in other cases.

Outcomes of kidney transplantation in patients with hepatitis B virus infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To assess outcomes of kidney transplantation including patient and allograft outcomes in recipients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, and the trends of patient's outcomes overtime.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database from inception through October 2017. Studies that reported odds ratios (OR) of mortality or renal allograft failure after kidney transplantation in patients with HBV [defined as hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive] were included. The comparison group consisted of HBsAg-negative kidney transplant recipients. Effect estimates from the individual study were extracted and combined using random-effect, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird. The protocol for this meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; no. CRD42017080657).

RESULTS

Ten observational studies with a total of 87623 kidney transplant patients were enrolled. Compared to HBsAg-negative recipients, HBsAg-positive status was significantly associated with increased risk of mortality after kidney transplantation (pooled OR = 2.48; 95%CI: 1.61-3.83). Meta-regression showed significant negative correlations between mortality risk after kidney transplantation in HBsAg-positive recipients and year of study (slopes = -0.062, P = 0.001). HBsAg-positive status was also associated with increased risk of renal allograft failure with pooled OR of 1.46 (95%CI: 1.08-1.96). There was also a significant negative correlation between year of study and risk of allograft failure (slopes = -0.018, P = 0.002). These associations existed in overall analysis as well as in limited cohort of hepatitis C virus-negative patients. We found no publication bias as assessed by the funnel plots and Egger's regression asymmetry test with P = 0.18 and 0.13 for the risks of mortality and allograft failure after kidney transplantation in HBsAg-positive recipients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Among kidney transplant patients, there are significant associations between HBsAg-positive status and poor outcomes including mortality and allograft failure. However, there are potential improvements in patient and graft survivals in HBsAg-positive recipients overtime.

Lamivudine in the Treatment of HBV-related Liver Disease after Renal Transplantation: An Update

Diminished survival due to hepatitis B has been observed after renal transplantation (RT). Lamivudine, a second-generation nucleoside analogue, has been approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in patients with normal renal function. Numerous clinical experiences with lamivudine after RT have been recently published. Despite numerous shortcomings, all of these reports have shown encouraging results. The rate of clearance of HBV viremia ranged between 67% and 100%, and the frequency of ALT normalization was between 50% and 100% with lamivudine use. Even patients with fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis, a serious form of HBV-related liver disease with ominous course, have been successfully treated with lamivudine. Lamivudine therapy significantly improved the survival of HBsAg positive renal allograft recipients. However, numerous issues concerning the treatment of hepatitis B after RT remain unclear: the optimal time to initiate lamivudine, the appropriate duration of antiviral therapy after RT, and the role for pre-transplantation liver biopsy. Also, the management of lamivudine resistance remains a concern for physicians. Clinical trials are under way.

Hepatitis B in Solid-Organ Transplant Procedures Other Than Liver

Transplant is often the best treatment available for patients with end-stage organ failure. Hepatitis B virus infection in transplant procedures other than liver is a major concern because it can be a significant cause of morbidity and mortality after transplant. Due to the increased risk of hepatic complications, such as fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis or histologic deterioration after transplant, systematic use of nucleoside or nucleotide analogues shortly before or at the time of transplant is recommended (tenofovir or entecavir are preferable to lamivudine) in all patients, whatever the baseline histologic evaluation. Sustained viral suppression may result in regression of fibrosis, which in turn may lead to decreased disease-related morbidity and improved survival. Finally, due to the high mortality after nonliver transplant procedures, decompensated cirrhosis from chronic hepatitis B should be considered as a contraindication to nonliver transplant but an indication to combined organ transplant (ie, liver-kidney transplant). Because of the high prevalence of hepatitis B virus exposure in allograft donors and recipients, hepatitis B virus status must be considered during organ allocation. Prevention of hepatitis B virus-related complications in transplant recipients starts with vaccination and donor-recipient matching.

Hepatitis B in renal transplant patients

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) poses a significant challenge for both dialysis patients and kidney transplant recipients despite its decreasing rates, especially in developed countries. The best preventive method is vaccination. Patients with chronic renal disease should ideally be vaccinated prior to dialysis, otherwise, reinforced vaccination practices and close antibody titer monitoring should be applied while on dialysis. HBV infected dialysis patients who are renal transplant candidates must be thoroughly examined by HBV-DNA, and liver enzyme testing and by liver biopsy. When needed, one must consider treating patients with tenofovir or entecavir rather than lamivudine. Depending on the cirrhosis stage, dialysis patients are eligible transplant recipients for either a combined kidney-liver procedure in the case of decompensated cirrhosis or a lone kidney transplantation since even compensated cirrhosis after sustained viral responders is no longer considered an absolute contraindication. Nucleoside analogues have led to improved transplantation outcomes with both long-term patient and graft survival rates nearing those of HBsAg(-) recipients. Moreover, in the cases of immunized HBsAg(-) potential recipients with concurrent prophylaxis, we are enabled today to safely use renal grafts from both HBsAg(+) and HBsAg(-)/anti-HBc(+) donors. In so doing, we avoid unnecessary organ discarding. Universal prophylaxis with entecavir is recommended in HBV kidney recipients and should start perioperatively. One of the most important issues in HBV(+) kidney transplantation is the duration of antiviral prophylaxis. In the absence of robust data, it seems that prophylactic treatment may be discontinued in selected stable, low-risk recipients during maintenance immunosuppression and should be reintroduced when the immune status is altered. All immunosuppressive agents in kidney transplantation can be used in HBV(+) recipients. Immunosuppression is intimately associated with increased viral replication; thus it is important to minimize the total immunosuppression burden long term.

Chronic Hepatitis B, C, and D

Chronic hepatitis B, C, and D virus infections contribute significantly to the morbidity and mortality of immunocompromised individuals. To contextualize discussion of these infections in immunocompromised patients, this paper provides an overview of aspects of infection in normal hosts. It then describes differences in disease, diagnostic testing, and therapeutic management observed in immunocompromised patients.

Outcome of hepatitis B and C virus-associated hepatocellular carcinoma occurring after renal transplantation

Kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are subjected to immunosuppressive therapy that can enhance hepatitis B and C virus replication, leading to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and outcome of HCC in KTR. Case-control study. Patients with chronic HBV and/or HCV infection who underwent kidney transplantation between 1976 and 2011 and subsequently developed HCC were compared to a control group of patients with chronic HBV and/or HCV infection, matched for gender and age at HCC diagnosis, who did not receive kidney transplantation. Among 2944 KTR, 330 had hepatitis B and/or C. Fourteen developed HCC, a period prevalence of 4.2%. Age at HCC diagnosis was 52.6 ± 6.5 years (53.5 ± 5.7 in controls, P=.76). Time between transplantation and HCC diagnosis was 16.7 ± 2.7 years. Six HCCs were related to HBV, six to HCV and two to co-infection with HBV and HCV. Immunosuppressive therapy was comparable in HBV, HCV and HBV+HCV patients. At diagnosis, 71% of patients met Milan criteria (65% in the control group, P=.4). Alpha-fetoprotein levels, tumour characteristics and treatment modalities were comparable between both groups. Patient survival 2 years after HCC diagnosis was 28% in KTR, compared to 68% in controls (P=.024). Survival after HCC diagnosis is significantly worse in KTR compared to nontransplanted patients with HBV and/or HCV. Prevention is crucial and should be based on viral eradication/suppression before or after transplantation.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes in Hepatitis B Virus–Positive and –Negative Renal Transplant Recipients

Our aim was to compare the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of hepatitis B surface antigen–positive (HbsAg+) renal transplant recipients with HbsAg− recipients. A total of 204 patients who underwent renal transplantation in our center between 2001 and 2014 were included in the study. The patients were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 was the HbsAg− group (n = 136), and group 2 was the HbsAg+ group (n = 68). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of lymphocyte crossmatches, numbers of mismatches, immunosuppressive treatment protocols, and induction treatments. In the HbsAg+ group, 51 patients were hepatitis B virus DNA+, 64 patients were HbeAg−, and 4 patients were HbeAg+. A total of 57 patients (83.8%) were treated with lamivudine, 4 patients (5.9%) with entecavir, and 7 patients (10.3%) with tenofovir for hepatitis B infection. Graft and patient survival rates, graft functions, acute hepatitis rates, acute rejection rates, and other clinical outcomes of the groups were compared. Demographic data and immunologic risk profiles of the groups were similar. Acute rejection rates, graft survival rates, and patient survival rates were similar. Acute hepatitis rates, glomerular filtration rates on the last controls, and delayed graft function rates were higher in group 2, whereas chronic allograft dysfunction and new-onset diabetes mellitus after transplantation rates were similar between the groups. Our study revealed that graft and patient survival, and acute rejection rates were similar between HbsAg+ and HbsAg− recipients, whereas acute hepatitis rate was higher in HbsAg+ recipients.

[Infectious and neoplasic complications after kidney transplantation]

Infections and malignancies are the expected complications of immunosuppressive therapy, which non-specifically impairs cellular and humoral immune responses in renal transplant recipients. Infections were usually frequent and severe during the early post-transplant period (first year). Recent diagnostic methods (molecular biology) and availability of new antivirals, antifungal and antibiotic drugs made rapid diagnosis and systematic preventive strategies much easier and this resulted in a significant reduction of infections and infectious death in this population. However, new infectious agents like BK polyomavirus, hepatitis E virus, parvovirus (as well as Chigunkunya, West Nile and others in particular areas) were recently recognized as responsible of aggressive infections in the immunocompromised host. Malignancies are also common after transplantation, due to the intensity and duration of immunosuppression. Skin cancers and lymphoproliferative disorders are the most common and are undoubtedly caused by viral infections, but incidence of non-skin cancers is also increased. After reduction of immunosuppression, treatment is similar to non-transplant patients: Results are usually poor and cancer is now the third cause of death in transplant recipients. Due to their anti-proliferative and anti-tumoral properties, incidence of de novo cancer significantly decreased in patients receiving mTor inhibitors as maintenance immunosuppression; furthermore, in patients already diagnosed with Kaposi sarcoma or recurrent skin cancers, introduction of mTor was associated with stabilisation and/or regression of malignant lesions.

The Effect of Hepatitis B Virus on Graft and Overall Survival in Kidney Transplant Patients

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the effect of hepatitis B virus in kidney transplant patients in terms of patient care and survival.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed kidney transplant patients from 1993 to 2013. A control group with negative serology was selected. The hepatitis B virus-positive group was divided into 2 subgroups based on serologic status, treatments, and treatment responses. Group A had viral suppression, and group B had hepatitis B virus DNA persistence. Overall and allograft survival rates were compared.

RESULTS

We identified 32 hepatitis B virus-positive and 74 hepatitis B virus-negative patients. Positive group was treated with lamivudine (n = 23), lamivudine plus entecavir (n = 4), lamivudine plus tenofovir (n = 4), or lamivudine plus entecavir and tenofovir (n = 1). In group A (n = 15), antiviral treatment was given based on the presence of either hepatitis B surface antigen with negative hepatitis B virus DNA (n = 11) or hepatitis B virus DNA positivity (n = 4). Group B patients (n = 17) received antiviral treatment for persistence of hepatitis B virus DNA (n = 7) or for viral reactivation (ie, recurrence of hepatitis B virus DNA) (n = 10). Groups A and B did not differ significantly in terms of graft or overall survival. Liver biopsy was performed in 17 patients; 3 patients had high-grade fibrosis or cirrhosis, and 14 patients had normal histology or mild hepatitis. Median graft survival time was longer in positive group (69.5 mo vs 54 mo; P = .007). Five- and 10-year overall survival rates were comparable (89%-84% vs 96%-96%; P = .107).

CONCLUSIONS

Hepatitis B virus-positive kidney transplant patients have increased liver transaminase levels, longer graft survival times, and similar median overall survival rates compared with hepatitis B virus-negative patients.

Prevention of Hepatitis B reactivation in the setting of immunosuppression

Advances in the treatment of malignant and inflammatory diseases have developed over time, with increasing use of chemotherapeutic and immunosuppressive agents of a range of drug classes with varying mechanism and potency in their effects on the immune system. These advances have been met with the challenge of increased risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in susceptible individuals. The magnitude of risk of HBV reactivation is associated with the individual’s HBV serological status and the potency and duration of immunosuppression. Individuals with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and previously infected but serologically cleared HBV infection are both susceptible to HBV reactivation. HBV reactivation in the setting of immunosuppression is a potentially life threatening condition leading to liver failure and death in extreme cases. It is important to recognize that HBV reactivation in the setting of immunosuppression is potentially preventable. Therefore, identification of patients at risk of HBV reactivation and institution of prophylactic antiviral therapy prior to initiation of immunosuppression is essential.

Pretransplant Hepatitis B Viral Infection Increases Risk of Death After Kidney Transplantation: A Multicenter Cohort Study in Korea

Clinical outcomes in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with hepatitis B virus (HBV) have not been thoroughly evaluated. Here, we investigated recent posttransplant clinical outcomes of KTRs with HBV and compared them with KTRs with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and seronegative KTRs.Of 3855 KTRs from April 1999 to December 2011, we enrolled 3482 KTRs who had viral hepatitis serology data; the patients were followed up for 89.1 ± 54.1 months. The numbers of recipients with HBV and HCV were 160 (4.6%) and 55 (1.6%), respectively. We analyzed the clinical outcomes, including overall mortality and graft failure, among patients who had undergone kidney transplantation.Patients with HBV showed poorer survival (P = 0.019; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 2.370; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.155-4.865) than KTRs without HBV. However, the graft survival of patients with chronic hepatitis B did not differ from that of patients without HBV. Hepatic complications were the primary causes of mortality of KTRs with HBV. Mortality significantly correlated with a higher grade of inflammation (P = 0.002) and with the use of lamivudine or adefovir antiviral treatment (P = 0.016). HBV-positive KTRs treated with the new-generation antiviral agent entecavir showed improved patient survival compared with KTRs receiving lamivudine (log-rank P = 0.050). HCV did not affect patient survival; however, it increased the incidence of graft failure (P = 0.010; adjusted HR = 2.899; 95% CI: 1.289-6.519). KTRs with HCV had an increased incidence of acute rejection (log-rank P = 0.005, crude HR = 2.144; 95% CI: 1.341-3.426; P = 0.001).KTRs with chronic hepatitis B may exhibit poor survival due to post-transplantation hepatic complications. Pretransplant histological liver evaluations and adequate antiviral management with potent nucleoside/nucleotide analogues are needed to improve the survival of KTRs with chronic hepatitis B even when liver function is within the normal range.

Increased risk of hepatic complications in kidney transplantation with chronic virus hepatitis infection: A nationwide population-based cohort study

Data regarding the risk of various liver diseases among different hepatitis viruses in kidney transplantation have not yet been identified.We selected individuals with kidney transplantation (ICD-9-CM V420 or 996.81) from 2000–2009 from the catastrophic illness registry of National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD)as the study cohort. The two end-points in the study included overall death, and post-transplant occurrence of hepatic disease. After adjustment for other risk factors, the risk of mortality was increased in patients with HBV infection (N = 352) and with HCV infection (N = 275) compared to those with neither HBV nor HCV infection (N = 3485). In addition,renal transplant recipients with HBV alone,HCV alone, and both with HBV and HCVinfectionrespectively had an approximately 10-fold hazard ratio (HR) = 9.84, 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.61–21.0, 4-fold increased risk (HR = 4.40, 95% CI: 1.85–10.5)and 5-fold increased risk (HR = 4.63, 95% CI: 1.06–20.2)of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)compared to those with neither HBV nor HCV infection. Our findings showed a significant risk of de novo liver disease in recipients with hepatitis virus infection. Based on our findings, we reinforce the importance and impact of hepatitis virus in renal transplantation.

[Management of hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus infection in chronic kidney failure]

Chronic infections by hepatitis B (HBV) and C virus (HCV) result in diagnosis and therapeutic issues in dialysis and kidney recipients patients. The exposure to nosocomial, including blood transfusion, risk explains the high prevalence of HBV and HCV infection in this setting. Chronic infection reduces the survival of both patients and allografts, including a specific risk of de novo glomerulonephritis. Cirrhosis was considered as a contra-indication to renal transplantation given the high risk of decompensation and death, questionning the indication of a combined liver and kidney transplantation. Thus, it is mandatory to screen HBV and HCV markers in all dialysis patients, whether or not they are candidates to transplantation. Liver biopsy allows evaluating the severity of the liver disease since the noninvasive markers of fibrosis appear to be less accurate in "renal" patients than in the general population and to better define antiviral therapeutic indications. HCV treatment was mainly based on pegylated interferon α (and low doses of ribavirin), which is contra-indicated in kidney recipients given the risk of graft rejection; HCV treatment is now based on the use of oral direct acting antivirals, which are very potent and well tolerated. HBV replication is now easily suppressed by second-generation nucleos(t)tidic analogues (entecavir and tenofovir), which will be indicated in all the dialysis patients with significant fibrosis (F2,3 or 4 according to the Metavir scoring system) and in any candidate to renal transplantation and to any HBsAg-positive kidney recipients. The best treatment remains preventive by anti-HBV vaccination for HBV and by the respect of universal hygiene rules for HCV.

Acute exacerbation of chronic hepatitis B virus infection in renal transplant patients

INTRODUCTION

There is scarce information regarding clinical evolution of HBV infection in renal transplant patients.

AIMS

To evaluate the prevalence of acute exacerbation in HBV-infected renal transplant patients and its association with the time after transplantation, presence of viral replication, clinical evolution, and use of antiviral prophylaxis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

HBV infected renal transplant patients who underwent regular follow-up visits at 6-month intervals were included in the study. The criteria adopted to characterize exacerbation were: ALT >5× ULN and/or >3× baseline level. Predictive factors of exacerbation evaluated were age, gender, time on dialysis, type of donor, post-transplant time, ALT, HBeAg, HBV-DNA, HCV-RNA, immunosuppressive therapy, and use of antiviral prophylaxis.

RESULTS

140 HBV-infected renal transplant patients were included (71% males; age 46 ± 10 years; post-renal transplant time 8 ± 5 years). During follow-up, 25% (35/140) of the patients presented exacerbation within 3.4 ± 3 years after renal transplant. Viral replication was observed in all patients with exacerbation. Clinical and/or laboratory signs of hepatic insufficiency were present in 17% (6/35) of the patients. Three patients died as a consequence of liver failure. In univariate analysis variables associated with exacerbation were less frequent use of prophylactic/preemptive lamivudine and of mycophenolate mofetil. Lamivudine use was the only variable independently associated with exacerbation, with a protective effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute exacerbation was a frequent and severe event in HBV-infected renal transplant patients. Prophylactic/preemptive therapy with antiviral drugs should be indicated for all HBsAg-positive renal transplant patients.

Entecavir treatment in kidney transplant recipients infected with hepatitis B

Although nucleotide/side analogs improve the clinical outcome of hepatitis B surface antigen-positive (HBsAg+) kidney transplant recipients (KTR), a significant proportion of subjects have developed resistance to lamivudine (LAM). We retrospectively analyzed the efficacy and tolerability of entecavir (ETV) in HBsAg+ KTR at Queen Mary Hospital during 2005-2013. Twenty-one patients (10 treatment-naïve, 11 with LAM resistance) were included (duration of ETV treatment 34.7 ± 22.9 months, range 6-75 months). ETV treatment led to a decline of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA titer compared to baseline and is more significant in the treatment-naïve group (treatment-naïve: p = 0.028, <0.001 and <0.001; LAM-resistant p = 0.273, 0.180, and 0.109 after 12, 24, and 36 months). The cumulative rate of HBV DNA undetectability at 12, 24, and 36 months was 60%, 100%, and 100% for treatment-naïve group, and 27%, 45%, and 45% for LAM-resistant group, respectively. Time-to-HBV DNA undetectability and time-to-alanine transaminase (ALT) normalization were 15.7 ± 4.6 and 12.6 ± 3.7 months for treatment-naïve patients, and 24.5 ± 4.2 and 28.2 ± 3.5 months for those with LAM resistance. Genotypic resistance to ETV emerged after 20.0 ± 3.5 months with increase in ALT and HBV DNA in two patients with LAM resistance, but was not observed in the treatment-naïve group. Allograft dysfunction, de novo cirrhosis, or hepatocellular carcinoma did not occur during follow-up.

Effect of prophylactic versus preemptive lamivudine treatment and tenofovir on HBsAg+ kidney transplant recipients

OBJECTIVES

Chronic hepatitis B virus infection remains a clinical problem for HBsAg (+) kidney transplant recipients. Lamivudine is the approved treatment; however, there are contrary views about optimal initiation. In case of resistance, novel nucleoside analogs should be considered but experience is limited.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was a retrospective cohort study that included 58 HBsAg (+) kidney transplant recipients. Medical records were reviewed for nucleoside analogs, viral replication, and graft/hepatic functions. Prophylactic and preemptive lamivudine modalities were compared to reveal optimal initiation. Additionally, novel nucleoside analogs were evaluated for safety and efficacy.

RESULTS

The graft/patient survival rates for HBsAg (+) recipients were the same as those of hepatitis-free recipients (P = .18). Prophylactic group had 24 and the preemptive had 34 patients. In the prophylactic group, there were fewer hepatic dysfunctions (12.5% vs. 30%, P = .12), viral breakthroughs (16% vs. 32%, P = .17) and elevated alanine aminotransferase concentrations (37% vs. 52%, P = .24), however these did not reach statistical significance. Progressive hepatic dysfunction was observed in 5 patients. Treatment was altered to tenofovir (n = 4) and adefovir (n = 1), and adequate virologic/biochemical response was achieved. These nucleoside analogs were almost as safe as lamivudine, as there were no significant differences among proteinuria (4740 ± 9480 vs 1250 ± 430 mg/L; P = .60) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (1.23 ± 0.37 vs 1.10 ± 0.35 mL/s; P = .33) CONCLUSIONS: Lamivudine is an efficient means of providing comparable graft/patient survival with hepatitis-free kidney transplant recipients. The prophylactic initiation of lamivudine may be better in preventing hepatic dysfunction. Tenofovir can be an effective and safe treatment for lamivudine-resistant kidney transplant recipients.

Successful withdrawal of antiviral treatment in kidney transplant recipients with chronic hepatitis B viral infection

BACKGROUND

The optimal duration of antiviral therapy for kidney transplant recipients (KTR) with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection remains unclear. We reported the long-term outcomes after withdrawal of antiviral agent in KTR with chronic HBV infection.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated the hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive KTR with antiviral agents between January 2002 and January 2012. Antiviral treatments were withdrawn in patients who met all of the following 7 criteria: (i) no clinical and histologic evidence of cirrhosis, (ii) normal liver biochemistry, (iii) negative for both HBV DNA and hepatitis B envelope antigen (HBeAg), (iv) no resistance to antiviral agent, (v) antiviral therapy > 9 months, (vi) maintenance dosage of immunosuppressant for > 3 months, and (vii) no history of acute rejection during recent 6 months. All patients were followed regularly at approximately 3-6 months for liver enzyme, viral markers, and HBV DNA level after antiviral withdrawal.

RESULTS

Among a total of 445 KTR, 14 HBsAg-positive patients were included in this study. Antiviral agents were used, with lamivudine in 11 patients, and with adefovir, entecavir, and telbivudine in 3 patients, respectively. Discontinuation of antiviral agent was attempted in 6 (42.9%) of 14 patients who satisfied the criteria. The median duration of antiviral therapy before withdrawal was 14.3 months (range, 9-24 months). Four (66.7%) of 6 patients were successfully withdrawn and remained negative for HBV DNA for a median 60.5 months (range, 47-82 months). The baseline HBV DNA level was not related to maintenance of remission after withdrawal. Two reactivated patients resumed antiviral treatment immediately, with subsequent normalization of HBV DNA. During the follow-up, 1 patient developed hepatocellular carcinoma; however, no patient death or graft failure was reported for all HBsAg-positive KTR.

CONCLUSIONS

Antiviral therapy can be discontinued successfully and safely in selected KTR with chronic HBV infection, after complete suppression of HBV and sufficient duration of antiviral therapy.

Review article: nucleos(t)ide analogues in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection and chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

The treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is based on nucleoside (lamivudine, telbivudine, entecavir) or nucleotide (adefovir, tenofovir) analogues (NAs), but it may be complex and the information is scarce. Entecavir and tenofovir represent the currently recommended first-line NAs for NA-naive CHB patients, while tenofovir is the NA of choice for CHB patients with resistance to nucleosides.

AIM

To review the efficacy and safety of NAs in adult CHB patients with CKD and to provide reasonable recommendations for their optimal management.

METHODS

Literature search in PubMed/Medline and manual search of relevant articles, reviews and book chapters.

RESULTS

NAs are cleared by kidneys and their dosage should be adjusted in patients with creatinine clearance <50 mL/min. There are concerns about nephrotoxic potential of the nucleotides, particularly adefovir, while improvements of creatinine clearance have been reported under telbivudine. Most existing data in CHB patients with CKD are for lamivudine and, less frequently, for other NAs, mostly entecavir. Besides CHB, NA should be used in case of immunosuppressive therapy in any HBsAg-positive patient with CKD including renal transplant (RT) recipients and in anti-HBs-positive recipients of kidney grafts from HBsAg-positive donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic hepatitis B patients with chronic kidney disease receiving nucleoside analogues should be followed carefully for treatment efficacy and renal safety. Despite the absence of strong data, entecavir and telbivudine seem to be the preferred options for nucleoside analogue-naive CHB patients with chronic kidney disease, depending on viraemia and severity of renal dysfunction. More studies are certainly needed in this setting.

Systematic review of hepatocellular carcinoma mortality rates among hepatitis B virus-infected renal transplant recipients, with supplemental analyses of liver failure and all-cause mortality

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this review was to compare the mortality rates for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) among hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-seropositive renal transplant (RT) patients versus HBsAg-seropositive persons of the general population.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed to identify cohort studies of HBsAg-seropositive RT patients with at least 4 years of follow-up. Data were analyzed as outlined below. HCC was a rare event in regions of low and intermediate seroprevalence of HBsAg. Subsequently, studies from low and intermediate seroprevalence areas were analyzed separately from those of high seroprevalence areas.

RESULTS

Thirty-one retrospective studies that followed 1277 seropositive RT patients were identified for inclusion. The studies were pooled and compared to four different general population studies that included 12558 seropositive persons using Poisson methods. The mortality rate of HCC was increased in low and intermediate seroprevalence areas (RR 7.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.93-15.0; RR 9.92, 95% CI 5.38-18.3). In high seroprevalence areas, the mortality rate of HCC was increased compared to one population study, but not another (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.64-4.63; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.61-1.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality due to HCC was increased in low and intermediate seroprevalence areas, but the evidence was inconclusive for high seroprevalence areas.

Common infections in kidney transplant recipients

Infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients. To some extent, these may be preventable. Careful pretransplant screening, immunization, and post-transplant prophylactic antimicrobials may all reduce the risk for post-transplant infection. However, because transplant recipients may not manifest typical signs and symptoms of infection, diagnoses may be confounded. Furthermore, treatment regimens may be complicated by drug interactions and the need to maintain immunosuppression to avoid allograft rejection. This article reviews common post-transplant infections, including prophylactic, diagnostic, and treatment strategies, providing guidance regarding care of kidney transplant patients with infection.

Benefits associated with antiviral treatment in kidney allograft recipients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is more frequent in kidney recipients than in the general population with a higher rate of liver-related morbidity and mortality. We evaluated the benefit associated with HBV viral suppression by nucleos(t)ide analogues treatment in HBV-infected kidney recipients.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 42 HBsAg-positive kidney recipients, 33 males, 9 females, median age 54 years, followed up during a mean of 15.4±11.8 years after kidney transplantation. Mean treatment duration by single or combined nucleos(t)ide analogues was 6.8±4.3 years. Fibrosis, before treatment, according to Metavir score was: F4 for 6 patients, F3 for 10, F2 for 6, and F0-F1 for 20 patients. The primary end point, the patient survival, was defined as patient death or liver transplantation, the secondary end point was graft survival.

RESULTS

HBV DNA at the last evaluation was undetectable (<12 IU/ml) in 92.8% of patients. During the follow-up, 8 patients died (17.7%), death being related to hepatocellular carcinoma in 4 (9.5%), including 1 patient with baseline mild fibrosis, and to extrahepatic causes in 4. This mortality rate is strikingly lower than that previously reported in HBV-infected kidney recipients before oral antiviral therapies. Graft survival seems to be improved when compared to the former series.

CONCLUSIONS

Suppression of HBV replication associated with nucleo(s)tide analogues treatment improves the survival of HBV-infected kidney recipients. Viral suppression does not exclude regular follow-up given the risk of occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma even in non-cirrhotic patients.

A novel experience of antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis B in renal transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Entecavir (ETV) is a potent inhibitor of viral replication in chronic hepatitis B. There is no published data concerning ETV therapy in nucleoside analogue (NUC)-naive hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive renal transplant recipients (RTRs).

METHODS

We prospectively treated 27 HBsAg-positive RTRs with ETV since 2007. Serial HBV DNA was assessed at baseline and weeks 12, 24, 52 and 104 after treatment. A cohort of 19 patients who received 2-year lamivudine (3TC) therapy during 2004-2007 was used as a historical control.

RESULTS

Of the 27 RTRs, 18 (67%) were NUC-naive patients and 9 (33%) were 3TC-experienced without YMDD mutations. HBV DNA levels became undetectable in 70%, 74%, 96% and 100% of patients after 12, 24, 52 and 104 weeks, respectively, of ETV treatment without viral resistance. There was no change of glomerular filtration rate, and no lactic acidosis or myopathy during treatment. By comparison with the 19 3TC-treated patients, ETV-treated RTRs presented higher rates of undetectable HBV DNA than 3TC-treated RTRs (32%, 37%, 63% and 63% at 12, 24, 52 and 104 weeks; P<0.005). In an analysis excluding 9 patients from the ETV group who were also 3TC-experienced, the remaining 18 ETV-naive RTRs exhibited a better virological response at 52 and 104 weeks than 19 3TC-treated RTRs (P<0.05). Even in the 9 patients who overlapped in two cohorts, ETV exhibited a more rapid virological response than 3TC did, especially at 12 and 24 weeks (P=0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

ETV is effective in treating chronic hepatitis B in RTRs. ETV is safe with regards to renal graft function, lactic acidosis, myopathy and virological resistance.

Viral hepatitis in solid organ transplantation other than liver

Transplantation is the best treatment for end-stage organ failure. Hepatitis virus infections, mainly hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections still constitute a major problem because they are common in allograft recipients and are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality after transplantation. Recently, hepatitis E virus infection has been added as an emergent cause of chronic hepatitis in organ transplantation. The prevalence of HBV and HCV infections has markedly decreased in patients who are candidates for transplantation since the introduction of screening, hygiene and prevention measures, including systematic screening of blood and organ donations, use of erythropoietin, compliance with universal hygiene rules, segregation of HBV-infected patients from non-infected patients and systematic vaccination against HBV. A liver biopsy is preferable to non-invasive biochemical and/or morphological tests of fibrosis to evaluate liver fibrosis before and even after transplantation. Treatment with entecavir or tenofovir is indicated in HBV-infected dialyzed patients who have moderate or severe disease (≥A2 or F2 on the Metavir scale) in preparation for renal transplantation. Due to the risks of severe reactivation, fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis or histological deterioration after transplantation, systematic use of nucleoside or nucleotide analogues shortly before or at the time of transplantation is recommended (tenofovir or entecavir are preferable to lamivudine) in all patients, whatever the baseline histological evaluation. In HCV-infected dialyzed patients who are not candidates for renal transplantation, the indication for antiviral therapy is limited to significant fibrosis (fibrosis ≥2 on the Metavir scale). Treatment must be proposed to all candidates for renal transplantation, whatever their baseline histopathology, and interferon-α should be used as monotherapy. After transplantation, interferon-α is contraindicated but may be used in patients for whom the benefits of antiviral treatment clearly outweigh the risks, especially that of allograft rejection. All cirrhotic patients, notably after solid organ transplantation, should be screened for hepatocellular carcinoma. Sustained suppression of necro-inflammation may result in regression of cirrhosis, which in turn may lead to decreased disease-related morbidity and improved survival. Finally, due to the high mortality after renal transplantation, active (namely without sustained viral suppression) cirrhosis should be considered a contraindication to kidney transplantation, but an indication to combined liver-kidney transplantation; on the contrary, inactive (namely with sustained viral suppression) compensated cirrhosis may permit renal transplantation alone. Organ transplantations other than kidney (cardiac or pulmonary transplantations) involve the same diagnosis and therapeutic issues.

The therapeutic response of antiviral therapy in HBsAg-positive renal transplant recipients and a long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND

Early prediction of lamivudine (LAM) response by individualized monitoring of serum HBV DNA like roadmap concept, and investigation of the outcome after LAM discontinuation in renal transplant recipients (RTRs) with chronic hepatitis B (CHB).

METHODS

We conducted a study on 19 RTRs with HBV infection receiving LAM treatment for 2 years from 2004 to 2007. HBV DNA level was assessed at baseline, 12, 24, 52, and 104 weeks after treatment. Risk factors of tyrosine-methionine-aspartate-aspartate (YMDD) mutation on treatment and relapse rate of HBV after LAM discontinuation were analyzed.

RESULTS

HBV DNA levels became undetectable in 32, 37, 63, and 53% of patients after 12, 24, 52, and 104 weeks of LAM treatment, respectively. Overall, three (16%) and five (33%) patients were detected with YMDD mutations at week 52 and 104, respectively. In the concept of roadmap, of the seven patients with inadequate virologic response (IAVR) at week 24, five had YMDD mutations. There was no significant association of YMDD mutations with age, gender, genotype, cirrhosis, HBeAg status, baseline HBV DNA, precore/core promoter mutations, and primary response, except IAVR at week 24 (P = 0.001). The relapse rate of HBV after LAM discontinuation was high (75%) during a median follow-up of 65 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of LAM resistance in RTRs is similar to immunocompetent CHB patients in a 2-year therapy. By roadmap concept, RTRs with IAVR require a change in therapy to prevent viral resistance. Relapse after LAM withdrawal is frequent. Long-term antiviral therapy is crucial for immunosuppressed patients.

Hepatitis B virus and renal transplantation

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection remains an important cause of liver disease in the renal transplant (RT) population, potentially diminishing survival. Consequences of HBV infection after RT include progression to decompensated cirrhosis and an increased risk of hepatocellular carcinoma. Although precautions initially recommended by the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention 30 years ago have substantially reduced HBV transmission within hemodialysis units, acute HBV outbreaks continue to be reported in patients with chronic kidney disease on maintenance hemodialysis. In addition, immigration from areas of high HBV prevalence implies that HBV-infected organs with chronic kidney disease will continue to enter the RT pool. Fortunately, the advent of oral therapy for HBV infection now reduces the risk of HBV progression post-RT.

Chronic viral hepatitis in kidney transplantation

Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in potential kidney transplant candidates-once considered absolute contraindications to kidney transplantation-no longer creates overt barriers to transplantation. Advances in the medical management of HBV and HCV infection have created opportunities for a substantial number of patients to be effectively treated with antiviral therapy before transplantation. For HBV infection, a number of new drugs enable clearance of the virus with minimal adverse effects and drug resistance. Pretransplantation antiviral therapy is advisable for patients with HCV infection, but adverse effects are common and viral eradication remains challenging. Regardless of viral clearance, pretransplant patients without bridging fibrosis (as confirmed by liver biopsy) or clinical stigmata of cirrhosis should be considered for kidney transplantation as survival is superior when compared to treatment with dialysis, and progression of liver disease is unlikely. For patients with advanced liver disease, simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation is an important consideration. These treatment advances further increase the burden of organ donor shortage; however, organs from deceased donors with chronic HBV or HCV infection could be efficiently allocated to certain individuals with a viral infection of the same type to increase the pool of available transplant organs.

Long-term outcome of renal transplant recipients with chronic hepatitis B infection-impact of antiviral treatments

BACKGROUND

Antiviral treatment has improved the short-term outcome of kidney transplant recipients with chronic hepatitis B infection, but its long-term impact, especially in patients who have developed drug resistance, remains uncertain.

METHODS

Sixty-three hepatitis B surface antigen positive (HBsAg+) and 63 HBsAg- patients who have undergone kidney transplantation from 1985 to 2008 were retrospectively reviewed and their clinical outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

With lamivudine as initial treatment, 62% of patients developed drug resistance after 4 years. Lamivudine resistance was associated with a higher incidence of chronic hepatitis but had no significant impact on liver stiffness score or patient survival during follow-up. Salvage treatment with adefovir or entecavir was well tolerated, and resulted in a three-log decrease in hepatitis B deoxynucleic acid after 6 months and normalization of alanine aminotransferase in 75% of patients. The survival rate of HBsAg+ patients transplanted in the recent era of antiviral treatment was 81% at 10 years. Treatment of hepatitis B with nucleoside/nucleotide analogues resulted in significantly improved patient survival (83% vs. 34% at 20 years, P=0.006). Although antiviral treatment was associated with reduced mortality because of liver complications (P=0.036), liver-related deaths still accounted for 40% of mortalities in HBsAg+ patients in the era of antiviral therapies and 22.2% of all deaths that occurred in patients who had received antiviral treatment.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of HBsAg+ renal transplant recipients with nucleoside/nucleotide analogues confers long-term survival benefit, and that rescue therapy with adefovir or entecavir is effective and well tolerated in patients who had developed resistance to lamivudine.

Hepatitis B virus infection and renal transplantation

Although the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection has declined in renal transplant recipients (RTRs), it remains a relevant clinical problem with high morbidity and mortality in long-term follow up. A thorough evaluation, including liver biopsy as well as assessment of HBV replication in serum (i.e. hepatitis B e antigen and/or HBV DNA) is required before transplantation. Interferon should not be used in this setting because of low efficacy and precipitation on acute allograft rejection. The advent of effective antiviral therapies offers the opportunity to prevent the progression of liver disease after renal transplantation. However, as far as we are aware, no studies have compared prophylactic and preemptive strategies. To date, the majority of RTRs with HBV-related liver disease have had a high virological and biochemical response to lamivudine use. However, lamivudine resistance is frequent with a prolonged course of therapy. Considering long-term treatment, antiviral agents with a high genetic barrier to resistance and lack of nephrotoxicity are suggested. The optimal strategy in RTRs with HBV infection remains to be established in the near future.